: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:14 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

yes, you have a duty of care to protect yourself,

maurie didnt brace himself for impact, thats his problem

it cant be a high tackle when your arms are by your side, thats just crazy,

i would also add with his feet also planted

: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:19 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

yes, you have a duty of care to protect yourself,

maurie didnt brace himself for impact, thats his problem

it cant be a high tackle when your arms are by your side, thats just crazy,

but shouldnt we count the shoulder as part of the arm, as you can only takle with your arms?

bailey didnt do anything wrong. but i think the rules should be altered before burrows loses his head to someone steaming in. if we say you can make a tackle as high as you want if your arms are by your side we're gonna see all kinds of madness...

: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:20 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

Right, so I take the ball up at first receiver and run straight at you. It's my responsibility as the ball carrier to ensure that I put my head in a place where you can't hit it if you stand still?

I'm sorry, but that's ludicrous.

I don't think it is, the defender could stand there on side with his eyes closed and not move a muscle, how on earth could he be doing anything wrong?

IMO nobody did anything wrong, it's the most physical of physical sports and sometimes these things happen.

: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:27 pm  

lurchio wrote:

if we say you can make a tackle as high as you want if your arms are by your side we're gonna see all kinds of madness...

That is the inherent danger with the laws as they stand and Potter is right to point it out.

In my opinion it's probably time for the shoulder only challenge to be outlawed.

: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:31 pm  

i dont know if it shold be outlawed, but the responsibility should be with the defender for where it lands and it should be deamed violent conduct if you land someone one in the chops

: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:37 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

yes, you have a duty of care to protect yourself,

maurie didnt brace himself for impact, thats his problem

it cant be a high tackle when your arms are by your side, thats just crazy,

Agree with that bit. Disagree with the final line, of course it can be a high tackle even if he doesn't use his arms.

Potter was interviewed on SSN last night and he said something along the lines of, "When a player ducks from 6ft 4 to 6ft and breaks his nose something is going wrong." However, my opinion on that is that if he runs upright and Bailey hits him in the same way, he hits him in the chest.

Just my look on it though.

Oh and like tvoc said I think it may be time to have a look at the rule on this type of tackle. As someone said before, SBW put in some massive hits but I'm pretty sure he has had a few bad shoulder injuries as well?

: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:38 pm  

tvoc wrote:

That is the inherent danger with the laws as they stand and Potter is right to point it out.

In my opinion it's probably time for the shoulder only challenge to be outlawed.

Wouldn't make a great deal of difference to the modern game TBH. Tackling is moving more towards restraint & wrestling techniques rather than out and out collisions and will, I suspect, continue to do so.

: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:39 pm  

Glenn Quagmire wrote:

Oh and like tvoc said I think it may be time to have a look at the rule on this type of tackle. As someone said before, SBW put in some massive hits but I'm pretty sure he has had a few bad shoulder injuries as well?

It can backfire badly, ask Adrian Morley.

: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:44 pm  

lurchio wrote:

i dont know if it shold be outlawed, but the responsibility should be with the defender for where it lands and it should be deamed violent conduct if you land someone one in the chops

For me you primarily tackle with the arms. A shoulder without the arms wrapping around is a dangerous technique both for the player giving and receiving and it probably explains why they are rarely seen in a game.

: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:56 pm  

lurchio wrote:

but shouldnt we count the shoulder as part of the arm, as you can only takle with your arms?

bailey didnt do anything wrong. but i think the rules should be altered before burrows loses his head to someone steaming in. if we say you can make a tackle as high as you want if your arms are by your side we're gonna see all kinds of madness...

but you cant alter the height of yous shoulder as you can your arm,

they way maurie was running had bailey dipped his shoulder to hit mauries chest it would have greatly increased the risk of a clash of heads which could have resulted serious injury to both parties

and you can only shoulder barge as high as your hieght players arent going to start leaping into each other for many reasons, not least it being a rubbish technique easily stepped

and burrow wouldnt run in like maurie did, he is much more agile and so runs more angles looking to step and duck, than trying to run through a player like maurie tried

there is no need to change the rules, this isnt a new thing and it adds to the game